Notes and Comments / Nouvelles brèves

Notes and Comments /
Nouvelles Brèves

DuncanStacey

Parks Canada

RichardStuart

SheilaStevenson

NOTES AND COMMENTS - NOUVELLES BREVES THE IRON CHINK by Duncan Stacey Butchering machines revolutionized the salmon-canning
industry on the Pacific Coast of North America in
the first decade of the twentieth century. Unlike
other machinery in the salmon cannery, these
machines were not copies or modifications of
equipment used in the vegetable- and meat-canning
industries of eastern North America and Europe; they
were, in fact, the only machines designed
specifically for the salmon
cannery.1Before 1900 all butchering of salmon was done by Chinese
and Indian contract labour. Butchering gangs were
composed of about thirty men, each of whom processed
about 1,500 to 2,000 fish (by removing the heads,
tails, guts, and fins) in a ten-hour
day.2 Before 1901 these men
were paid a wage which averaged from a dollar per
day to thirty-five dollars per
month.3 The major problem
with this manual butchering process was that when
long working hours were demanded, and they often
were, no consistent quality or speed of butchering
was possible. As the butcher tired, more and more of
each fish was wasted due to deeper cuts and
production per man declined. Long hours slowed down
the butcher's speed and the quality of the work
he did. Waste of salmon was not a major concern in the early
years of the industry because of the abundance of
the salmon resource. Because butchering was the
first process on the canning line, however, a
decline in the speed of the work was a problem as it
slowed down the entire productive capacity. By 1900
many machines had been introduced to other parts of
the canning line as aides to the workers there. The
soldering machines, steam retorts (cookers),
conveyors, gang knives, and filling machines had
made the rest of the line too efficient; hand
butchers could not keep up with it and so created a
bottleneck in the processing.4With the introduction of prototype butchering machines
about 1900 this sector of the canning line could
produce faster and more cheaply. These machines got
rid of the butchering bottleneck and enabled the
entire canning process to speed up. This innovation
and the introduction of the sanitary or solderless
can system in 1912 led to the establishment of the
modern high-speed canning
line.5 Many different designs
of butchering machines were developed, but the Smith
butchering machine, commonly known as the "Iron
Chink" (a name still used today in trade
circles, as is the term "Chinkman" for the
operator of an Iron Chink6)
because it replaced Chinese butchering gangs, became
the best known and to this day remains the only
butchering machine design in use. The Iron Chink was invented by E.A. Smith of Seattle in
1903 and was patented in 1905. Most secondary
sources credit Smith with mechanical brilliance
because of his invention, but these accolades would
probably not stand up under challenge. A Swedish
patent was granted for a similar device in 1899 and
in 1901 two other designs were patented in San
Francisco. Letson and Burpee, a Vancouver, British
Columbia, machinery producer, patented the first
west coast prototype in 1900 and another in
1902.7 In 1903 another Lower
Mainland machinery firm, the Schaake Machine Works
of New Westminster, produced the Kellington
fish-cleaning machine which was used in the British
Columbia Packers' Cleeve Cannery on the Fraser
in the same year.8 Three more
of these machines were added to other B.C.
Packers' canneries in 1905. This all happened
before the introduction of the Iron Chink to the
Fraser River in 1906. Not only the time sequence but
also the place where these inventions were developed
cast doubt on Smith's originality. Letson and
Burpee developed its machine at Burpee and Letson
Pacific American Fisheries in Fairhaven, Washington,
the same area where Smith started work on his Iron
Chink in 1903. Finally, the fact that Smith
Associates hired a lawyer, Francis W.H. Clay, to
investigate all possible infringements on his patent
by Letson and Burpee, Kellington, and all others
holding patents on butchering
machines,10 leads one to
believe that Fraser River canning machinery
producers played a far greater role in the
development of the butchering machine than
previously supposed. The surge of butchering machine innovation between 1901
and 1906 was a response to two problems facing the
Fraser River salmon-canning industry —
overcapitalization and labour
shortages.11 In 1901
forty-nine canneries operated on the river; this was
also the year of one of the largest salmon runs in
history. As a result of these two factors there was
extensive overproduction, a market glut, and a rapid
decline in the price of canned salmon. The canneries
were overcapitalized not in machinery but in the
field of operating capital and fixed capital such as
buildings. Mechanized butchering could decrease
operating capital in the canneries by decreasing
butchering costs and by increasing production per
canning line or lines as one butchering machine
could supply more than one canning line. Butchering
machines occupied far less cannery floor space than
that required by butchering gangs and so some
canneries could be closed down and their machinery
centralized in the remaining canneries. All this was
done by 1906. B.C. Packers, formed in 1902, closed
down fourteen of its canneries and moved the
equipment into its fifteen remaining
plants.12After the peak run of 1901 and the ensuing
centralization of plant and machinery in direct
response to overcapitalization, the other recurring
problem, labour shortages, severely affected the
innovation in butchering machines. This labour
shortage can be traced to effective head taxes
levied to keep Chinese labour out of the country.
During the 1901 salmon season this head tax had been
$100 per person, but by the 1904 season it had
risen to $500. By 1901 cannery work was almost
exclusively done by Chinese contract workers at wage
rates between $35 and $50 per month, but
with the raising of the Chinese head tax in 1904,
the local Chinese contractors formed a combination
to corner the labour market and increase
wages.13 At first this bid
failed on the Fraser as a Chinese contractor named
Lee Coy broke ranks with the others and provided all
the B.C. Packers' canneries on the river with
his own contract workers.14 By
1905, however, the first peak season after 1901,
Chinese labour for the canneries was scarce. Chinese
contractors were hiring Japanese and other labour
along with their Chinese in order to make up cannery
gangs. Even by supplementing their gangs this way
shortages were so bad that not enough help could be
found to process all the
fish.15 Not only was the
supply of labour short, it was distinctly inferior
in quality.16 This reinforced
the canners' desire to use butchering machines
as unskilled butchers slowed down the line and
wasted fish. With the Iron Chink the canner needed
only one skilled operator and one or two unskilled
assistants rather than thirty trained butchers to
perform the same task. In 1906, therefore, three Iron Chinks were installed in
Fraser River canneries.17 It
could be that more were not installed because their
usefulness was most apparent during the big runs of
1908 and 1909 when the canneries ran night and day
and the men who handled the fish got tired and worn
out with resulting careless prosecution of their
work. Another reason was that before 1907 the Iron
Chink was unable to clean the entire fish
automatically. Earlier machines, such as the Letson
and Burpee design, only gutted and cleaned the fish
after the head, tail, and fins were removed. Also,
by 1906 cannery workers' wages had risen from
thirty-five dollars per month in 1901 and forty to
forty-eight dollars per month in 1905 to sixty-five
dollars.18Apart from providing a faster and cheaper way to butcher
fish, the Iron Chink eased the pressure of labour
shortages for the canners. It also increased the
profit per fish by decreasing the waste and gave a
consistent quality of butchering previously
unattainable under the manual butchering system.
"Under the old method of hand cleaning much of
the fish which was good was sliced off when the fins
were removed. When hundreds of thousands of salmon
are being cleaned even the smallest amount of waste
is quite an item of
loss."19 The saving of
fish by the Iron Chink was estimated at about half a
fish to the case; for every twenty-four cases
mechanically cleaned an extra case was produced as
compared to manual cleaning.20In summary, the Iron Chink was by no means the first
butchering machine nor was it the only good one.
Primary evidence suggests that Fraser River
entrepreneurs and machinists played a far greater
role than is generally recognized in the development
of the only major piece of salmon-canning equipment
made specifically for the West Coast. Inventions and
innovations of butchering machines were in direct
response to problems in the turn-of-the-century
salmon fishery, specifically overcapitalization and
the scarce supply of skilled labour. NOTES 1. The same cannot be said for the salmon fishery which
has numerous West Coast innovations in vessel and
gear design such as Fraser River and Rivers Inlet
skiffs, Columbia River boats, net drums, and puretic
blocks to name a few. 2. Vancouver
Province, 25 July 1906. 3. Canada, Labour
Gazette, 1 (1900-1901), p. 353. 4. Duncan Stacey, "Technological Change in the
Fraser River Salmon Canning Industry,
1871-1912" (M.A. thesis, University of British
Columbia, 1977), chap. 1. 5. Ibid., p. 6. 6. Many fishery (and logging) artifacts have trade names
with racial or national overtones. Airfilled fishing
bouys are called "Scotchmen" and a
fish-skinning machine is called a
"klootchskinner" after the native hand
labor it replaced. 7. "Fish Cleaning Machines, References for Smith
Investigation, November 25, 1905," Sheils
Papers, Western Washington State College Geography
Archives, Bellingham, Wash. 8. Pacific
Fisherman, Annual Edition for 1903, p.
52. 9. Pacific
Fisherman 3 (June 1905), p. 23. 10. "Fish Cleaning Machines, References for Smith
Investigation, November 25, 1905," Sheils
Papers. 11. Stacey, "Technological Change," chap. 4. 12. "B.C.P. Association General Managers Report,
July 17, 1905," Doyle Papers, Special
Collections, University of British Columbia Library,
Vancouver, B.C. 13. "Cuttings from Newspapers," 1903-04, Doyle
Papers. 14. "Fraser River" diary, p. 248, Doyle
Papers. 15. Canada, Sessional
Papers, 1906-07, no. 22, app. 2, p. 29. 16. Pacific
Fisherman 4 (September 1906), p. 18. 17. Pacific
Fisherman 4 (May 1906), p. 13. 18. Canada, Labour
Gazette 1 (1900-1901), p. 51; Canada,
Department of Labour Report, 1909; Canada, Sessional Papers,
1909, no. 17, p. 105. 19. Vancouver
Province, 25 July 1906. 20. "Iron Chink Machine," Doyle Papers. AN APPROACH TO MATERIAL CULTURE RESEARCH: THE S.S.
KLONDIKE CARGO HOLD by Richard Stuart IntroductionThe purpose of this article is to suggest an approach to
researching material culture which proceeds from a
historical perspective and which can provide a data
base for future projects. It is based upon research
undertaken to determine the contents of the cargo
hold of a Yukon sternwheeler during 1937-43 for the
S.S. Klondike National Historic Site in
Whitehorse. The S.S.
KlondikeThe sternwheeler Klondike was launched in 1937, the
last vessel of its type built for use on the Yukon
River by the White Pass and Yukon Route's river
division, the British Yukon Navigation Company. It
gave the company eighteen years of satisfactory
service on the route between the head of rail at
Whitehorse and the two mining camps of Dawson and
Mayo. The construction of a network of all-weather
roads eventually rendered river transportation
redundant and the Klondike was beached in 1955, never to
return to service. Today the vessel is a designated
national historic site which Parks Canada is
restoring to the 1937-43 period. The testimony of former crew members, the use of
technical manuals, and structural investigation of
the boat itself provided much of the necessary
information about the operation of the S.S.
Klondike.
Similarly, the material needed to restore it to its
operating appearance was identified and located.
What remained to complete an accurate reconstruction
was information about the nature and appearance of
commodities carried, the transportation of which
provided the vessel's raison d'etre. Research
ProblemThe sources available to initiate research on the cargo
were limited. Only one contemporary photograph of
the cargo hold outward bound from Whitehorse was
located, but this combined with the oral testimony
of crew members made it possible to determine the
location of various articles in the hold. Way-bills
dating from the period after the Second World War
and personal reminiscences helped to identify some
brands. There was not, however, detailed information
about products carried, the most common brands used,
or the quantities involved. There were three possible approaches to stocking the
cargo hold accurately. The first was to estimate
what products were used in the Yukon on the basis of
artifacts held in public and private collections. As
this depended upon the random survival of
appropriate packaging, it would inevitably lead to
anachronisms. For example, products which no longer
existed in 1937 as well as those whose initial
appearance postdated 1943 would be juxtaposed. The
proportion of wooden to cardboard packaging would
probably be inaccurate. The relationship of national
to regional brands and the proportion of common to
less common items would probably be distorted. The second and more desirable approach was to represent
the cargo hold exactly as it appeared on a given
day, but this was not possible since completely
accurate records, enabling every article to be
identified, were not available. A third approach, combining the facility of the first
with the exactitude of the second, was to identify
as accurately as possible the nature and quantities
of products carried and to recreate a
"typical" cargo from 1937-43. In fact,
sufficient sources did exist to determine what was
carried, and to a considerable degree the brands
could be dated and their appearance identified.
Thus, a typical cargo could be assembled, reflecting
not the cargo of a given day but a representative
sample of those carried. Re-creating a Typical
CargoThe approach taken was to identify what was appropriate
on the basis of contemporary evidence and only then
to assess the usefulness of artifacts already
available or attempt to obtain ones which had been
identified. Because packaging underwent dramatic
changes between 1937 and 1943, from a technology of
wood and burlap to one of paperboard and plastic, it
became essential to date prototypes to as narrow a
range of years as possible, something most
accurately done from contemporary sources. Research for the project was directed primarily at
products identified as being available in the Yukon
at the time, secondarily at the main source of
supplies, the Vancouver processing and warehousing
complex, and finally at national brands available
during the period. This involved local, region, and
national sources, cross-referenced at each stage.
Yukon newspapers, the White Pass and Yukon Route
holdings in the Yukon Archives, and oral informants
were used to identify local availability. Public and
private holdings in Vancouver and Victoria,
contemporary catalogues, and a regional
grocer's magazine (Kelly Douglas and
Company's Nabob) provided ample information
about regional and national products from the late
1930s. These were checked against local sources to
determine whether or not they had been available in
the Yukon. Finally, the Trade Marks Branch of the
Ministry of Consumer and Corporate Affairs, company
histories and archives, and national trade journals
such as Canadian
Grocer complemented information
acquired on regional and local levels. The data sought theoretically could have been located in
the National Museums of Canada's National
Inventory, but this proved impossible for two
reasons. The Inventory is a recent programme with a
limited pool of information and is restricted to
artifacts deposited in member institutions.
Secondly, it lists artifacts, but makes no provision
for identifying documentary sources. Thus the
Inventory cannot provide either a broad scope of
data or the capacity to date items noted in
contemporary photographs. There is nothing to
prevent the material identified in this study from
being entered in the Inventory at a later date, but
until it can include resources located in private
holdings and identify contemporary sources for
information, the system outlined below is more
useful. Retrieval
SystemThe retrieval system suggested here is based upon the
immediate needs of a specific project, but it can
provide a data base for similar projects in the
future. It retains the information acquired on a
systematic basis for ease of retrieval; it can
easily absorb new information; and everything in it
could eventually be integrated into the National
Museums' National Inventory. Inevitably, not every product or brand researched will
be completely documented nor will photographs or
artifacts be available for all. However, as this is
a data base, the gaps can be filled as information
becomes available. The data collected for the S.S. Klondike project
were organized towards the following ends: a. to identify the nature of a
product; b. to identify brands actually or most likely used in
the Yukon during 1937-43;c. to prove the availability of such brands in the Yukon
during the period under consideration, noting that
while most would be available for the period
1937-43, some would not;d. to identify the location of either contemporary
photographs of the products or possible
prototypes;e. to provide sufficient flexibility for the inclusion
of miscellaneous factors. Sixteen variables were identified which met the needs of
the Klondike project and which could be
applied to other restorations or reconstructions.
Those listed under "Identification" could
apply to any project as they provide basic data. The
information contained in the variables listed under
"Location" could be added to depending on
the needs of another project and period. Indeed,
such additions would enhance the value of the data
base. The variables under "Justification"
could be changed to suit the project. All variables
are discussed below and sample entries are
reproduced at the end of the paper. Ⅰ. Identification - name of brand, owner of trade
mark, dates used. 1. Brand Name 2. Original Owner 3. Present Owner 4. Product5. Trade Mark Registration6. Trade Mark Registration Date7. Year of First Use8. Example of Trade Mark Ⅱ. Location - of artifacts or of contemporary
iconographie evidence. 9. Picture - Unit10. Picture - Case11. Artifact - Unit12. Artifact - Case Justification - evidence of the use of the product
during the period under consideration. 13. Advertisement -
Dawson14. Advertisement - elsewhere15. W.P. Ç Y.R. Collection16. Other (e.g., oral source) Ⅰ. IDENTIFICATION 1. Brand Name -
the obvious starting point for any packaging
information. Most often it is the actual brand
(e.g., "Aylmer," not "Canadian
Canners"), but occasionally the company name
(e.g., "Pillsbury's Best" or
"Robin Hood") 2. Original
Owner - both the owner of the trademark
and the registered user. Because such information
often appears on the label of the packing case, the
range of dates for a prototype can be narrowed. For
example, "Shredded Wheat" breakfast cereal
was manufactured by the Canadian Shredded Wheat
Company which only began to use the term
"Nabisco" in 1940. Photographs of Shredded
Wheat packages in Nabob (Christmas 1935, p. 105, and May
1943, p. 29) show this difference. On the basis of
this information, the value of a wooden
"Shredded Wheat" packaging case found in
the Yukon is called into question because the word
"Nabisco" does not appear on it. It
certainly would not be appropriate to any
restoration after 1940, although it might be for the
period 1937-40. 3. Present
Owner - in many cases identical to the
original, but a change of ownership provides a date
for identification. Also, knowing the present owner
would be useful for obtaining artifacts or
photographs. 4. Product. In
most cases there is only one. "Best
Procurable" is Scotch whiskey,
"Mazola" is cooking oil, but terms such as
"Aylmer," "Nabob," or
"Heinz" cover a range of products which
appear and disappear on a variable basis. It would
thus be possible to select an artifact with the
correct brand but an anachronistic product. 5. Trade Mark
Registration. This provides information
on ownership, products (and often the dates they
were introduced), the range of dates, etc. The marks
are filed in the Trade Mark Registry Division of the
Ministry of Consumer and Corporate Affairs, Hull.
These are registered in three folio systems which
are arranged on a chronological basis. However, it
is not the folios but the card catalogue systems,
comprising six different divisions, which are the
points of entry for information. Two of these
catalogues "Design" and "Trade Mark
Act," relate to the main series of folios which
contain a description or an example of the mark to
be registered, a list of products covered,
information about ownership, and references to
related trade marks. There is not, however, any
reference to packaging. A further division, relating
to the "Unfair Competition Act," is
located in a separate folio series, indicated by the
letters "N.S." preceding the folio number.
Similar information to that found under the
"Trade Mark Act" is provided here,
although descriptions rather than pictures of trade
marks are used. Also, because of the importance of
proving first use for purposes of proving
"unfair competition," the first date of
use is indicated. Two other files,
"Pending" and "Expunged," refer
to the Trade Mark Act folios, either for marks not
yet registered or those removed from active use.
Finally, a separate file for Newfoundland
registrations before 1949 can be traced through the
Trade Mark Act card catalogue. Because registration was not compulsory, several
anomalies in the above divisions are possible.
First, brands which other sources (e.g., oral
informants, W.P. $ Y.R. records) identify and for
which prototypes exist may not be registered.
Examples include "Ormand's Biscuits,"
a Victoria-based company, "Klondyke" soap,
made by the Royal Crown Soap Manufacturing Company,
and "Dr. Price's Baking Powder."
Secondly, American manufactured products such as
"Dr. Price's" were not necessarily
registered in Canada. Finally, in at least one case,
a product ("Hormel") which was only
registered in Canada in 1979 was available through a
Canadian company forty years ago in the Yukon. 6. Trade Mark Registration
Date. This often, but not always,
provides a reasonably accurate indication of the
first date of use. "Peek Frean," for
example, was registered only in 1948 (N.S.
124/31939, 2 October 1948), but the sale and
distribution of "Peek Frean" biscuits go
back much further. Similarly,
"McCormick's" biscuits, registered in
1961 (no. 127,717), have been available since the
last century. 7. Year of First
Use. This is either the date of
registration or a specified date. For example,
"York" brand for canned foods was only
registered in 1947 (N.S. 148/37901), but the brand
was first used in 1916. Similarly, the distinctive
"B.C. Sugar" Company trademark with the
"Rogers" signature (60/14624) was
registered 1 April 1910, but was certainly in use
before the turn of the century. 8. Example of a Trade
Mark. In most cases this is merely a
word — e.g., "Sani-Flush." In
others, it is a label with distinctive figures and
colours. Some labels, such as "Lux"
Flakes, changed between the date of registration and
the late 1930s while others like
"Squirrel" Peanut Butter were the same
when registered and in 1937, but have changed since. II. LOCATION 9. Picture -
Unit. Most of these came from two
grocery trade magazines, the regional Nabob and the
national Canadian
Grocer, between 1936 and 1948, although
other contemporary sources were consulted. Pictures
of units such as boxes, bottles, bags, bars, and
cans provide no information about packing cases, but
they can be of value for the interpretation of the
vessel's galley and for the rare occasions when
a label was used on a packing case. 10. Picture -
Case. These provide the most valuable
pieces of iconographie evidence, enabling an exact
date to be placed on artifacts, serving as a model
for reproduction, and showing whether wood or
cardboard was used. However, there may have been
products which were shipped in cardboard in southern
Canada but in wood in the north. One suggestive
example of this is the "Aylmer" brand.
Most photographs show its products in cardboard
boxes, but one, from the Hudson's Bay
Collection and probably dating to the 1930s, shows a
wooden case of "Aylmer" ketchup. Cardboard
cases were probably used to ship goods from
Vancouver to the Yukon as the White Pass route held
fewer hazards for a packing case than did the
Mackenzie River system, but such cannot always be
assumed. Other valuable sources in addition to the
two grocery trade magazines were photographs from
the Vancouver Public Library, the Public Archives of
Canada's National Photography Collection, Kelly
Douglas Company, the Beaver magazine. 11. Artifacts -
Unit. Most of these were located in the
Yukon or British Columbia. By reference to
photographs, these can often be dated.
Unfortunately, durable packaging such as metal or
glass is more likely to survive than cardboard.
These were found in the same collections as the
units. III. JUSTIFICATION 13. Advertisement -
Dawson. Advertisements in the Dawson News
provided an accurate indication of products
available, although forty years ago, as now, the
amount of advertising for tobacco, beer, and spirits
may have presented a distorted impression of sales
volume. Similarly, companies with popular products
may have needed to expend little effort in
advertising them, while others attempting to
establish or maintain a portion of the market
advertised more extensively. Thus, there were no
advertisements for "Pacific" canned milk
although oral accounts and waybills suggested its
pre-eminence. On the other hand, Borden's
"St. Charles Milk" and
"Carnation" were extensively advertised,
but according to oral informants were never as
popular as "Pacific." 14. Advertisements -
elsewhere. These appeared in a
mimeographed sheet, the Mayo Miner, and in
the Whitehorse
Star. Firms established in Mayo but not
in Dawson would advertise products not mentioned by
the Dawson
News, but presumably available in
Dawson too. 15. W.P. & Y.R.
Collection. The most important
component of this large collection was located in
the "Corporate Record," Group 1, Series V,
2-A "Waybills, 1-1131, 1936-1948." Also of
value was V-6, "Claims against the W.P. S. Y.R.
1936-1938." The waybills, although limited to
the post-war period, indicate the shippers,
consigners, products, some brands, and, most
important, the quantities involved. The claims
indicate items available in the 1930s, but relate
primarily to points in the United States. 16. Other -
specifically artifacts (or photographs) of items
from the Yukon and the testimonies of the managers
of two retail outlets in the Yukon. Other brands may have been available in the Yukon during
the period under consideration in addition to the
documented ones. Evidence for this was found in a
1937 MacDonald's
Consolidated catalogue, a wholesale
catalogue for the grocery trade. Other, mainly
eastern "national" or American, brands
were listed in Canadian Grocer, but they were not
necessarily available in Vancouver and probably not
in the Yukon either. Finally, by way of annotation, miscellaneous notes can
be indicated. Thus, one informant provided
additional information about such varied products as
baking powder, canned peaches, canned milk, and
flour which no waybill or catalogue possibly could. Research
ImplicationsThe retrieval system outlined above, based on a minimum
number of variables, could be expanded to meet the
needs of other similar projects. Obviously, it
cannot hope to achieve the theoretically more
comprehensive coverage of the National Museums'
Inventory, but it does include inconographic
evidence, it integrates private as well as public
collections into the data base, and it is available
for immediate use. There are three possible levels of use for this proposed
system. To meet the needs of immediate projects,
researchers can use the same variables to systemize
their research on material history. Thus, a project
directed towards the restoration of a grocery store
in the Gaspe in the 1920s could organize data on the
same basis, using what information is common
(particularly that classified under
"Identification" and "Location")
and adding data to the base. The information
obtained using this system would probably be limited
by project and by region, but with the available
data base information useful to other researchers in
the same region (e.g., a Dawson grocery store, ca.
1904) or time period (a museum exhibit relating to
the 1930s) would be available. The research
undertaken for the first project would not be lost
and could provide a starting point for future
projects. Over a longer time, the system could be computerized,
since all research would have been organized
according to the same system, to allow for complete
access to all the data gathered. Sample entries of data collected for the S.S. Klondike project
and organized according to the retrieval system
discussed above are shown on the following three
pages.CONFERENCE REPORT: "THE ROLES OF DOCUMENTARY ART IN
UNDERSTANDING A CULTURAL HERITAGE" 31 October - 1 November 1980, Halifax, N.S. by Sheila Stevenson This conference, co-sponsored by the Federation of
Museums, Heritage and Historical Societies of Nova
Scotia and the Mount Saint Vincent Art Gallery, was
held in conjunction with the exhibit "Great
Expectations: The European Vision in Nova Scotia:
1749-1848,"1 a
substantial visual record of Nova Scotia produced
during the first 100 years of British settlement
after the founding of Halifax. The exhibit itself is
based on the thesis of curator Mary Sparling
— that the artist of that time showed only
those aspects of the colony which were considered
appropriate and thus the visual record reveals the shifting fashion in artistic
convention during the first hundred years of British
colonial rule.... The resulting image of Nova Scotia
was distorted and gave a misleading impression at
home and abroad, in its own time; in the present day
it is equally misleading if used by historians as a
literal record of the
past.2Organized by Sparling, the conference provided an
opportunity for people to consider collectively the
use of this visual record as documentary evidence in
understanding our cultural
heritage.3 As keynote speaker
Hugh Taylor of the Public Archives of Nova Scotia
noted, visual material is a part of the cultural
record and should be used correctly. American art historian Jay Cantor was guest curator for
"The Landscape of Change," an exhibition
of pictorial material which he had identified and
catalogued as source material for Old Sturbridge
Village in Massachusatts. His presentation offered
many images of rural, inland New England between
1780 and 1860 and the following observations: - the views were generally dedicated to the immediate
translation of observed facts; - the views tended to concentrate on a feature rather
than on spaces between things; - most views were of harvest or tilling to illustrate
industry and an economic motive; - there were no bird's-eye views of
backward-looking, recumbent towns; - pictures bring time and space together more
effectively than does text. The images he showed were unlike those in "Great
Expectations" in style and in subject matter,
an exciting contrast and one which indicated that
material historians have a rich source of
information in evidence which has been seen to be
the preserve of art historians. Marie Elwood of the Nova Scotia Museum illustrated the
same point as she presented the work of J.E. Wool
ford, draughtsman to George Ramsay, ninth Earl of
Dalhousie, when he was Lieutenant-Governor of Nova
Scotia (1816-19) and Governor-in-Chief of British
North America (1819-28). As a military topographer
Woolford was trained to provide for each view a
precise title, the direction from which the artist
viewed the scene, the location, and the time, to
observe bridges, fords, and ferries, and to record
whether the bridges were of wood, iron, or stone.
That training imbued him as well with a knowledge of
the artistic conventions for Woolford felt that if
nature were wrong, "I cannot help but quote her
right." The fact that we must be mindful of artistic conventions
was reiterated by Michael Bell of the National
Gallery of Canada. He had decided not to discuss
conventions in detail, but by that point I was
longing for more detail. I felt the need for one
practical session in which the delegates would have
participated to see if they could sort out
convention from factual information. This need may
have been the best indicator that I was smitten with
curiosity and must now look and read for myself. The final presentation, by Mary Allodi of the Royal
Ontario Museum, provided evidence on early
printmaking in Canada. Alex Colville had the last
conference word, one which was encouraging and
deliberate. He suggested that museums and art
galleries had a responsibility to provide more text,
more supplementary information about the things that
we present to our audiences, and that whereas it has
been popular to believe that didacticism is an
elitist activity, perhaps we are being elitist in
not providing greater assistance to our audiences so
that they may know and understand more. Resources based on the conference and the exhibit
include a catalogue2 and a
series of three radio programmes based upon twelve
of the images reproduced on the exhibition poster
(which was designed to be used in conjunction with
the programmes). The exhibit catalogue is available
for $6.00 and the poster for $1.00 from
the Art Gallery, Mount Saint Vincent University,
Halifax, N.S., B3M 2J6. The conference proceedings
were taped and a copy can be obtained by sending
ninety minutes worth of blank tape to Education
Media Services, 5250 Spring Garden Road, Halifax,
N.S., B3J 1E8. NOTES 1. Exhibition schedule: Art Gallery, Mount Saint Vincent
University, Halifax, 17 October - 23 November 1980;
Canadiana Gallery, Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, 16
January - 23 February, 1981; McCord Museum,
Montreal, 25 March - 3 May 1981. Financial
assistance was provided by the Museum Assistance
Programmes of the National Museums of Canada. 2. Mary Sparling, Great
Expectations: The European Vision in Nova Scotia
1749-1848 (Halifax: Art Gallery, Mount
Saint Vincent University, 1980), p. 7. 3. The delegates included historical researchers, museum
curators and interpreters, art gallery curators, art
historians, public school art eachers, a film maker,
a university history professor, a magazine editor,
archivists, and historical society members. A SOURCE BOOK FOR THE ANALYSIS AND REPRODUCTION OF
TEXTILES Reproducing Nineteenth
Century Handwoven Fabrics: A Weaver's
Technical Guide to Accurate
Reproductions by Adrienne Dora Hood
(copyrighted 1980) is a source book for the accurate
reproduction of handwoven, utilitarian textiles of
Canadian provenance from collections in Eastern
Canada. This work is the result of an extensive
research project funded by the Canada Council's
Explorations Programme. It contains twenty-two
separate studies of original textiles used in
clothing and household textiles, as well as a
general introductory section, a list of yarn
suppliers, and an annotated bibliography. The author
is an accomplished spinner and weaver with valuable
experience as a curatorial assistant in the Textile
Department of the Royal Ontario Museum. Each study includes slides, historical documentation and
technical analysis of the original artifact,
detailed comments on the weaving and finishing of
the reproduction yardage, and a six-by-seven-inch
sample of the reproduction. These comprehensive
studies make accurate reproductions possible for any
experienced weaver who is interested in historical
textiles or is working in a museum or historical
restoration. As a technical guide this workbook
should be useful to anyone involved in demonstrating
traditional hand weaving or reproduction costuming.
If reproduction fabric is beyond one's budget,
the slides and samples give a good representation of
construction, colour, texture, and weight to help in
selecting commercially available fabrics The author has produced four copies of this source book
and deposited one at each the following: Nova Scotia Museum, Halifax, Nova
Scotia, Historic Section, (902) 429-4610National Historic Parks and Sites, Ottawa, Ontario, Interpretation Division, (613) 993-0071National Museum of Man, Ottawa, Ontario, History Division, (613) 995-2981Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, Ontario, Textile Department, (416) 978-3655 Patricia Young SYMPOSIUM ON THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF HISTORIC TECHNOLOGY For a theoretical and methodological work on the
archaeology of historic technology in North America,
I would like to correspond with all archaeologists
currently conducting research on the techniques,
processes, and behaviour
associated with the acquisition, growth,
manufacture, and repair of material culture during
the historic period. Such research would include
aspects of survey, sampling, excavation,
documentation, ethnography, experimentation,
re-creation, interpretation, and explanation of such
particularistic technologies as glassmaking, ceramic
manufacture, blacksmithing, weaponry repair,
woodworking, mining, husbandry, agriculture,
lumbering, fishing, fur trapping, shipbuilding,
canal building, and road construction. A Symposium on the Archaeology of Historic Technology in
North America, to be held at the January 1982
Society for Historical Archaeology conference in
Philadelphia, has the expressed goal of publishing
an academic/educational work on this subject, with
individual case studies written by each symposium
participant. If you would be interested in
participating in this symposium or in contributing a
case study for publication please contact, no later
than 15 June 1981: Lester A. Ross, Research
(Archaeology) Division, Parks Canada, 1600 Liverpool
Court, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 1G2 (613-993-9717). RESEARCH ON THE MUSICAL INSTRUMENT TRADE For the past several years research has been underway on
the history of the musical instrument trade in
Canada. Manufacturers and retailers are being traced
through census data, business directories,
contemporary newspapers and journals, municipal and
county histories, and archival sources. A future
survey will be undertaken to locate the instruments
and company trade catalogues, sales brochures, and
promotional literature. It is hoped that the
information on production, sales, and advertising
will provide insights on the domestic market-place
and on social attitudes towards these leisure goods
in household inventories regionally and over time.
Ultimately I hope to examine how regional and
chronological developments in the Canadian musical
instrument trade might reflect the larger
socio-economic contexts of Canadian society. A word
from anyone who shares these interests would be most
welcome. Please write: Frances Roback, Cultural
History Department, Glenbow Museum, 9th Ave. §
1st St. S.E., Calgary, Alberta, T2G 0P3. RESEARCH ON LAWN-MOWERS Sources of information are requested for Canadian-made,
nineteenth-century, hand-powered lawn-mowers
(otherwise known as pushmowers); photographs,
sketches, availability, dates, manufacturers are all
of interest. Send information to Linda
Dicaire-Fardin, Restoration Services Division,
Engineering and Architecture Directorate, Parks
Canada, Les Terrasses de la Chaudière, Ottawa,
Ontario K1A 1G2. CORRECTION: Martha Eckmann Brent, "A Stitch in
Time: Sewing Machine Industry of Ontario,
1860-1897" Material History Bulletin 11: 1-30. Dr. G.T. Bloomfield of the University of Guelph has
drawn the editors' attention to information
from Leo A. Johnson, History of Guelph, 1827-1927 (Guelph,
Ont.: Guelph Historical Society, 1977), p. 295,
which indicates that the acquisition of the Raymond
Sewing Machine Company by the White Sewing Machine
Company did not take place until 1916 and that the
production of sewing machines in Guelph lasted until
1922. Dr. Bloomfield suggests that the terminal year
of the Ontario-controlled sewing machine industry
should be moved forward to 1916.